To prevent the miscarriage of justice the constitutional framers while keeping in mind possible human mistakes even by the Judges of the highest Court, have provided scope of rehearing of a case by the same judge who has decided it.Review means to re-consider, to look again or to reexamine . In legal parlance , it is a judicial re-examination of the case by the same court. In review a judge who has disposed of the matter reviews an earlier order passed by him in certain circumstances. The main object of granting a Review of Judgement is reconsideration of the same matter in certain conditions. The power of review inheres in every court to prevent miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and palpable errors committed by it. The provision related to review constitutes an exception to general rule laid down in Order 20, Rule 3 which provides that the “judgment shall be dated and signed by the judge in the open court at the time of pronouncing it and, when once signed, shall not afterwards be altered or added to except as provided by Section 152 or on review. The Scope of power of review as envisaged under Order XLVII Rule 1 is very limited and review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order XLVII Rule 1. All decrees and orders cannot be reviewed. Review is permissible is permissible only when circumstances of a substantial and compelling character make it necessary to do so.